Significant Difference In Failure Rate Research Articles

WHO DAIRS WINS?

Periprosthetic joint infection is a serious complication of primary total hip replacement (THR) with significant associated morbidity. In acute infection, Debridement, Antibiotics and Implant Retention (DAIR) may be considered. Current national guidelines recommend a DAIR should be performed by “an experienced arthroplasty surgeon┕ but do not specify the need for this to be a revision arthroplasty surgeon. We investigated outcomes in our NHS Trust of DAIR procedures performed by revision and non-revision arthroplasty surgeons.Infection registry data and patient records were analysed for all DAIR procedures of infected primary THRs between 2017 and 2021. Data collected included details of the primary surgery, the presentation with infection, the DAIR procedure and any subsequent complications including return to theatre at any time point. Routinely collected pre- and post-operative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were reviewed.54 periprosthetic joint infections of primary THRs received a DAIR procedure. 41 DAIRs were performed by a revision surgeon and 13 by non-revision surgeons. There was no significant difference in time from primary THR to presentation with infection, time from presentation to DAIR or pre-operative C-reactive protein between the two groups.In 21 (38.9%) patients the DAIR procedure was classed as a treatment failure; 17 patients (31.5%) returned to theatre for further revision surgery, one (2.4%) died related to infection and three (5.6%) had persistent infection but did not receive further surgery. Treatment failure was significantly higher in the non-revision surgeon group (9/13 (69.2%)) than in the revision surgeon group (12/41 (29.3%)) (p = 0.02). Overall, improvement in PROMs after DAIR was seen at both six and 12 months.The overall success rate of DAIR was 61.1% and there was a sustained improvement in PROMs after surgery. However, there was a significant difference in failure rates between revision surgeons and non-revision surgeons.

Outcomes of Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Repair for Proximal Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The purpose of this study is to compare failure rates among different techniques of primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair for the treatment of proximal ACL ruptures. Meta-analysis and systematic review were completed, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Studies from Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed published between June 2011 and June 2022 reporting outcomes of primary ACL repair on proximal tears with a minimum two-year follow-up were included. Primary ACL repair was divided into dynamic, static, and non-augmented repair. The primary outcome was failure rates, and the secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and anterior tibial stability (ATT). Eighteen studies on primary ACL repair were included, with a total of 614 patients (ages rangingfrom 6 to 65, 60% male). Only two studies were level 1 randomized controlled clinical trials. The static repair had a failure rate of 33 out of 261 (12.6%), non-augmented was 17 out of 179 (9.4%), and dynamic repair was 31 out of 174 (17.8%); no statistically significant difference was found comparing the failure rates (p = 0.090). PROs using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm scores had weighted averages of 91.7 (95% confidence interval (CI): 89.6-93.8) and 94.7 (95% CI: 92.7-96.7), respectively. ATT had a weighted average of 1.668 mm (95% CI: 1.002-2.334). The primary findings of this paper include a 12.6% combined failure rate for primary proximal ACL repair with no significant difference in failure rate or PROs when accounting for the methodology of repair at a minimum two-year follow-up. It is important to note the lack of high-quality randomized controlled trials, the heterogeneity of included studies, and the lack of long-term data. Despite these limitations, the findings of the current analysis suggest that primary repair may be a useful treatment option for indicated candidates with proximal ACL ruptures. Further long-term and higher-quality comparative studies on ACL reconstruction are warranted.

Success rates and failures of fixed and removable space maintainers after the premature loss of primary molars.

The evidence base for the use of space maintainers is relatively sparce despite being used for decades after the premature loss of primary molars. This study aims to increase the dental evidence base via investigating retrospectively the success rates of prefabricated fixed and removable space maintainers inserted from 2019 to 2021 and followed up until February 2023 at a specialized university clinic and to identify reasons for any reported minor and major failure. The authors hypothesized that there is no significant difference in failure rates between fixed and removable space maintainers inserted after the premature loss of a single primary molar per quadrant. Patients' digital records were searched yielding 645 space maintainers. After the application of inclusion criteria, 157 (67%) fixed prefabricated space maintainers in 112 children and 77 (33%) removable space maintainers in 61 children were analyzed for an average of 18.4 ± 9.5 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with Mantel-Cox statistics showed an overall cumulative survival time of 31.6 months (SE = 1.15, 95% CI = 29.4 to 33.9). Major failure occurred significantly more in removable maintainers (n = 40/67, 59.7%), mostly due to loss of the appliance, compared to fixed space maintainers (n = 27/67, 40.3%; P < .001). The present study indicates that space maintainers were mainly placed in young children with high caries experience, where treatment was mostly possible using advanced behavior management. Fixed space maintainers had a significantly lower failure rate than their removable counterpart. However, both require continual repairs, preservation, or even replacement till the eruption of the permanent tooth.

Low Tensile Strength Suture With Transosseous Tunnels and Suture Anchors 5 mm in Diameter or Greater Are Associated With Higher Failure Rates in Primary Patellar Tendon Repair

To determine the rate of and risk factors for clinical failure and return to military duty following primary patellar tendon repair with either transosseous trunnel repair or suture anchor repair. The Military Health System Data Repository (MDR) was queried to identify all adult patients undergoing surgical treatment of a patellar tendon rupture in the Military Health System from 2014 to 2018. Patients who underwent either transosseous tunnel repair or suture anchor repair were included. Health records were examined to collect additional data. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine independent risk factors for rerupture. A total of 450 knees in 437 patients were included. Transosseous tunnel repair was the most frequently used technique (314/450, 77%), followed by suture anchor repair (113/450, 25%). Rerupture occurred in 33 knees (7%). There was no difference in rerupture rate between transosseous tunnel repair and suture anchor repair (P= .15), and this result persisted within the multivariate logistic regression model. Among transosseous tunnel repairs, use of low tensile strength suture was an independent risk factor for repair failure (odds ratio [OR], 3.4; P= .016). Among suture anchor repairs, use of anchors 5.0 mm in diameter or greater (OR, 12.0; P= .027) was an independent risk factor for repair failure. There is no statistically significant difference in failure rate between transosseous tunnel repair and suture anchor repair in primary patellar tendon ruptures. However, the use of low tensile strength suture with transosseous tunnels and the use of suture anchors 5.0 mm in diameter or greater resulted in significantly higher failure rates. These data suggest that use of high tensile strength suture in transosseous tunnel repair and use of suture anchors less than 5.0 mm in diameter in suture anchor repair result in lower failure rate in primary patellar tendon repair. Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Insertion Site Dilemma: Rethinking Radial Arterial Catheter Placement for Device Resilience.

The study by Marie et al (2023) discusses their outcomes regarding the distance of radial arterial catheters from the radiocarpal joint and its association to device failure, although authors found no significant difference in failure rates between catheters inserted proximally or distally to the radiocarpal joint. However, other recent studies have reported that catheters inserted more distally are more likely to fail, with rates high as 25%. Factors that contribute to failure include poor site selection, infection, device occlusion, or dislodgement. With reliance on accurate hemodynamics from arterial catheters, providers should be aware of the risks and take steps to minimize them, as catheter failure is more than just associated infection, the inability to aspirate blood or a useable arterial waveform. Optimal insertion location, use of ultrasound-guided techniques, appropriate securement, and close monitoring of the catheter, along with accurate reporting of failure reasons, will help clarify future research outcomes.

The Clinical Frailty Scale as a Predictor of Trial of Void Outcomes in Men Undergoing Transurethral Resection of Prostate Surgery

BackgroundWith the growing elderly population, there is an increasing prevalence of frail patients undergoing surgeries. A common operation in this group is the transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Whilst there is a demonstrable link between frailty and general adverse postoperative outcomes, there is limited research on frailty and trial of void (TOV) outcomes post TURP.This study aims to investigate possible associations between frailty, TOV outcomes, and postoperative complications following a TURP.MethodsA retrospective review was conducted of adult patients treated with TURP at 2 hospitals from January 2018 to December 2019, inclusive. Patient demographic data, preoperative Clinical Frailty Scale scores, trial of void outcomes, and complications were recorded and analysed. Clinical frailty scores (CFS) were recorded in accordance with the Dalhousie University Clinical Frailty Scale, ranging from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill).ResultsA total of 226 patients (median age 70.5 years) were identified for this study. Of these patients, 59 were identified as having a CFS of 1 to 2 (Group A), 140 patients had a CFS of 3 to 4 (Group B), and 27 patients had a CFS of 5 to 7 (Group C). Within the initial TOV, Group C had a statistically significant difference in failure rates compared with the other 2 groups, with Group C having the highest failure rate of 33.3% (9/27), followed by Group B with 14.3% (20/140), and then Group A with 13.6 % (8/59) (P = 0.04).ConclusionIn conclusion, greater preoperative frailty is associated with higher rates of initial TOV failure in post-TURP patients. Early objective identification of elderly patients with increased frailty is useful to help preoperative counselling and decision-making, to manage patient postoperative expectations, and to optimise patient care.

Direkte Pulpaüberkappung bei asymptomatischen kariösen primären Molaren mit drei verschiedenen Pulpaüberkappungsmaterialien

Purpose: Τo assess the outcome of direct pulp capping in asymptomatic carious primary molars using three pulp capping materials. Methods: In this prospective clinical trial, carious primary molars free of irreversible pulp inflammation signs and symptoms, with negative pain history and pulp exposure following caries removal were included. Teeth were divided into groups: A: Ca(OH)2, B: Pure Portland cement®, C: Biodentine™. Following anaesthesia, isolation, caries removal, pulp exposure, hemorrhage control, pulp capping, additional lining in groups A, B, teeth were restored with composite resin. Descriptive statistics, Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, multivariable random effects Cox regression model were performed. Results: Sixty-six patients (25 girls, 41 boys) with mean age 7.2 (± 1.7) years participated. The mean follow-up time was 13 months. Seventy-nine primary molars were assigned to groups A (n = 27), B (n = 29), C (n = 23). The overall failure was 16 % and the distribution by group was: A: 5 teeth, B: 5 teeth, C: 3 teeth. No significant differences in failure rates between capping materials, tooth types, age bands and genders were identified. Conclusions: Direct pulp capping in asymptomatic carious primary molars may be an acceptable option, when treating an exposed pulp with bioceramic materials as pulp capping agents.

P146 Pragmatic Biologic Tapering Combining Clinical and Ultrasound Assessment in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis in Routine Clinical Practice - Predictors of Failure from a Regional Centre in UK

Abstract Background/Aims Tapering biologic therapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is evolving. Our primary objective was to combine clinical and ultrasound assessment in selecting patients with RA for tapering biologic therapies. The secondary objectives were to identify predictors for failure and cost savings. Methods RA patients on biologics in sustained clinical remission (defined as DAS 28 &amp;lt; 2.6) in the previous year and imaging remission (defined as Power Doppler US of small joints of hands not significant) were included. The patients were seen in a multidisciplinary clinic with an advanced pharmacy practitioner between April 2019 and March 2022. They were advised to lengthen the interval of their biologics gradually and were followed quarterly till September 2022. Failure was defined as reverting to previous regime at any point during follow up. Independent predictors of failure were identified with Cox multiple regression analysis SPSS v29.0 (IBM 2022). Results Biologics were tapered in 184 patients including 129 on anti-cytokine therapy (abatacept 13, adalimumab 35, certolizumab 31, etanercept 18, golimumab 8, infliximab 4, tocilizumab 20) and 55 on rituximab. The mean age of the cohort was 63.8±11.7 years and there were 72.3% females. The mean duration of RA was 15.2 ± 7.9 years and baseline DAS28 before taper was 1.93±1.04 years. Concomitant DMARDs were used in 53.8%. Anti-cytokine therapy:Over 287.9 patient-years follow up (mean follow up duration: 26.8 ± 14.1 months), taper failure occurred in 36 (27.9%) patients in a mean time of 12.0 ± 8.1 months. There was no statistically significant difference in failure rate between different agents. A 50% dose reduction could be achieved in 65 (50.4%) patients with the mean time to achieve it of 10.4 ±9.1 months. Thirteen (10.1%) patients stopped biologics completely. Current smoking [HR:3.67 95%CI:1.50-9.00, p:0.04] and higher DAS28 at initiation of taper [HR:1.93 95%CI:1.11-3.36, p:0.020] were predictive of taper failure. All but 3 of the 36 patients who failed taper, responded on reverting to their previous treatment regime. Anti B-cell therapy:The 55 patients on Rituximab were tapered to a lower dose or had their interval lengthened. Over 98.6 patient-years follow up (mean follow up: 21.5 ± 11.3 months). Mean dose reduction achieved was 62.2 ± 19.9 %. Mean interval between RTX infusions was 12.9 ± 6.4 months. We have managed to save nearly £800,000 over the 3 years with tapering of biologics in this cohort of RA patients compared to the standard dose. Conclusion Successful tapering of biologic therapies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis is feasible and safe in majority of patients who are in clinical and imaging remission. Current smoking and baseline high DAS28 predicted taper failure for anti-cytokine biologics. This can be safely managed by reverting to the original dosing in most patients. Disclosure H. Muhammed VK: None. A. Yau: None. G. Hirsch: None. T. Sheeran: None. S. Venkatachalam: None.

Failure Rates of Repaired Bucket-Handle Tears of the Medial Meniscus Concomitant With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cohort Study of 253 Patients From the SANTI Study Group With a Mean Follow-up of 94 Months

Background: Failure rates of repaired bucket-handle medial meniscal tears (BHMMTs) concomitant with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are as high as 20%. The outcomes of posteromedial portal suture hook repair have not been compared with all-inside repair techniques for this subtype of meniscal lesion. Purpose/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and failure rates of patients who underwent BHMMT repair concomitant with ACLR using an all-inside technique, suture hook + all-inside technique, or suture hook + outside-in technique. It was hypothesized that no significant differences in failure rates would be found between the groups. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients diagnosed with a BHMMT who underwent meniscal repair during primary ACLR and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped based on the meniscal repair technique used: all-inside repair, suture hook + all-inside repair, or suture hook + outside-in repair. At the end of the study period, secondary medial meniscectomy rates were determined. Results: The study population comprised 253 patients who underwent repair of a BHMMT with concomitant ACLR with a mean follow-up of 94.0 ± 47.6 months. A total of 114 patients (45.1%) underwent all-inside repair, 61 patients (24.1%) underwent suture hook + all-inside repair, and 78 patients (30.8%) underwent suture hook + outside-in repair. Overall, there were 36 failures. The failure rates were 20.2%, 14.8%, and 5.1%, respectively (P = .0135). All-inside repairs were >4 times more likely to fail than suture hook + outside-in repairs (hazard ratio [HR], 4.103; 95% CI, 1.369-12.296; P = .0117). Failure was also 3 times higher (HR, 2.943; 95% CI, 1.224-7.075; P = .0159) for patients <30 years of age compared with those aged ≥30 years. An additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) was also found to reduce the failure rate of repaired BHMMTs concomitant with ACLR. Conclusion: Combined suture hook + outside-in repair of BHMMTs resulted in significantly fewer failures than all other techniques. Furthermore, age <30 years and no additional ALLR were associated with higher failure rates.

Comparative study of absorbable suture and permanent suture in sacrocolpopexy: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

The aim of this study was to compare the surgical results and the complications of absorbable suture (AS) versus permanent suture (PS) in sacrocolpopexy (SCP). We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials for articles in which researchers compared AS with PS in SCP. The primary outcomes were the surgical success rate and suture-related complications (suture exposure/erosion, mesh erosion, and suture removal). All analyses were performed with Review Manager 5.3. Four articles involving 689 patients were ultimately included. Our findings demonstrated that AS had similar surgical success rates to those of PS (OR=1.34; 95% CI, 0.60-2.96) and no significant differences in failure rates were noted between the two groups (OR=0.75; 95% CI, 0.34-1.66). Subgroup analyses in patients with anatomical failure revealed no significant differences in recurrent posterior prolapse (OR=0.33; 95% CI, 0.05-2.10) or in recurrent apical (OR=0.64; 95% CI, 0.03-13.66) or anterior prolapse (OR=0.45; 95% CI, 0.13-1.57). However, the AS group were at a lower risk of suture exposure/erosion (OR=0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.58) and a lower suture removal rate (OR=0.14; 95% CI, 0.03-0.61) and retreatment (OR=0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82), but the mesh erosion was not significantly different (OR=1.00; 95% CI, 0.49-2.08). The data showed that AS had a similar success rate, less exposure/erosion, and were less likely to be removed and require retreatment than PS, which supported the notion that AS is as effective as PS but safer.

A comparative study of digital nerve and digital arterial repairs performed using running versus interrupted suture techniques in finger replantations.

The present study aimed to retrospectively analyze replantations and compared the success rates of different suturing techniques. The data of 54 patients who underwent 82 finger replantations between January 2016 and April 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients who underwent traumatic total finger amputations were included in the study. Arteries were repaired with two techniques, the simple running suture technique and the simple interrupted suture technique. Demographic patient data, comorbidities, operative data, post-operative care, the length of hospital stay, mechanism of injury, and site of injury were recorded. The groups were statistically analyzed. Functional outcomes were evaluated according to the Quick DASH score. A total 54 patients with a mean age of 32.5±18.4 (range 1-75) who underwent finger replantation were included in the study. The mean duration of follow-up was 30.9±16.1 months. The mechanism of injury was guillotine-style injury in 29 (35.4%) fingers, avulsion injury in 15 (18.3%) fingers, and crush injury in 38 (46.3%) fingers. Forty-six fingers were repaired using a simple running suture technique, and 36 fingers were repaired using a simple interrupted suture technique. There was no statistically significant difference in terms of failure between the suture techniques (p=0.569). Further, although there was no statistically significant difference in Quick DASH scores according to the type of trauma in the simple running suture technique group (p=0.109), a comparison could not be made within simple interrupted suture technique group because of the small sample size. There was no statistically significant difference in failure rates between cases with an ischemia duration of <6 h and those with ischemia duration of 6-12 h (p>0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups according to age, body mass index, arterial hypertension, or diabetes mellitus (p>0.05). Statistically significant differences were found in univariate analysis according to surgery time per digit, smokers, or vein repair (p<0.05). In total, 65 (79.3%) out of 82 finger replantations were successful. A total of 17 out of 30 fingers that could not undergo venous repair survived because of treatment with medicinal leeches. Finger replantation is a difficult-to-perform surgical procedure requiring consideration of the surgical indications and the presence of an experienced surgical team. Regardless of the suture technique in finger amputations, performing venous anastomosis after arterial anastomosis is essential to restore circulation.

Suture Anchor-Based Quadriceps Tendon Repair May Result in Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes but Similar Failure Rates Compared to the Transosseous Tunnel Technique

The purpose of this study was to compare failure rates and patient-reported outcomes between transosseus (TO) suture and suture anchor (SA) quadriceps tendon repairs. Following institutional review board approval, patients who underwent primary repair for quadriceps tendon rupture with TO or SA techniques between January 2009 and August 2018 were identified from an institutional database and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were contacted for satisfaction (1-10 scale), current function (0-100 scale), failure (retear), and revision surgeries; International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS) were also collected to achieve a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Sixty-four patients (34 SA, 30 TO) were available by phone or e-mail at a mean of 4.81 ± 2.60 years postoperatively. There were 10 failures, for an overall failure rate of 15.6%. Failure incidence did not significantly differ between treatment groups (P= .83). Twenty-seven patients (47% of nonfailed patients) had completed patient-reported outcomes. The SA group reported higher subjective function (SA: 90 [85-100] vs TO: 85 [60-93], 95% CI of difference: -19.9 to -2.1× 10-5, P= .042), final IKDC (79.6 [50.0-93.6] vs 62.1 [44.3-65.5], 95% CI of difference: -33.0 to -0.48, P= .048), KOOS Pain (97.2 [84.7-97.2] vs 73.6 [50.7-88.2], 95% CI of difference: -36.1 to -3.6× 10-5, P= .037), Quality of Life (81.3 [56.3-93.8] vs 50.0 [23.4-56.3], 95% CI of difference: -50.0 to-6.2, P= .026), and Sport (75.0 [52.5-90.0] vs 47.5 [31.3-67.5], 95% CI of the difference: -45.0 to -4.1× 10-5, P=.048). There is no significant difference in failure rate between transosseus and suture anchor repairs for quadriceps tendon ruptures (P= .83). Most failures occur secondary to a traumatic reinjury within the first year postoperatively. Despite the lack of difference in failure rates, at final follow-up, patients who undergo suture anchor repair may report significantly greater subjective function and final IKDC, KOOS Pain, Quality of Life, and Sport scores. III, retrospective cohort study.

Biological Reconstruction of Localized Full-Thickness Cartilage Defects of the Knee: A Systematic Review of Level 1 Studies with a Minimum Follow-Up of 5 Years.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the best available mid- to long-term evidence of surgical procedures for the treatment of localized full-thickness cartilage defects of the knee. Systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines of Level 1 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), meta-analyses of RCTs and systematic reviews with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Data extracted included patient demographics, defect characteristics, clinical and radiological outcomes, as well as treatment failures. Six RCTs and 3 Level 1 systematic reviews were included. Two RCTs compared microfracture (MFx) to periosteum-covered autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI-P), 1 to matrix-associated ACI (M-ACI) and 2 to osteochondral autograft transplantation (OAT). One study compared OAT to collagen membrane covered ACI (ACI-C). The 3 Level 1 systematic reviews/meta-analyses assessed the outcome of MFx, OAT, and various ACI methods in RCTs. OAT showed significantly better outcomes compared with MFx. In the 2 RCTs comparing ACI-P and MFx, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were seen, whereas significantly better outcomes were reported for M-ACI versus MFx in 1 study including patients with larger defects (5 cm2), and for ACI-C versus OAT in terms of Cincinnati Score. Higher failure rates were reported for MFx compared with OAT and for OAT compared with ACI-C, while no significant differences in failure rates were observed for ACI-P compared to MFx. Restorative cartilage procedures (ACI-C or M-ACI and OAT) are associated with better long-term clinical outcomes including lower complication and failure rates when compared with reparative techniques (MFx). Among the restorative procedures, OAT seems to be inferior to ACI especially in larger defects after longer follow-up periods. Level I: Systematic review of Level I studies.

Patient Outcomes Following Flatfoot Reconstruction with the Use of a Spring Ligament Fibertape Device

Category: Hindfoot; Arthroscopy; Sports; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Flatfoot deformities are chronic debilitations that involve multiple ligament complexes that stabilize the hindfoot. No study has clearly evaluated the efficacy of utilizing the spring ligament internal-brace fibertape device as an adjunct through clinical and radiographic measures. The purpose of this study is to explore the diagnostic efficacy of 3T MRI to evaluate the spring ligament, and to compare operative failures, complications, and radiographic outcomes of patients who underwent procedures for posterior tibial tendon dysfunction (PTTD) that employed the internal-brace fibertape (IB) and those that did not in the non-internal-brace (NIB) group. Methods: Following IRB approval, patients that underwent flatfoot reconstruction by four surgeons at a single institution between 2015 and 2018 were queried from an institutional radiology database. A total of 44 cases were identified with procedures that utilized the IB, and those that underwent MRI preoperatively had spring ligament integrity compared to intraoperative findings. These 44 cases that utilized the IB were subsequently match paired 1:2 with an NIB group. Data was collected retrospectively for both clinical and radiographic outcomes. Clinical outcomes included failures leading to reoperation, complications, and additional procedures. Radiographic parameters involved pre- and post-operative comparisons. Inadvertent reoperations that implicated malunion or the need for a triple arthrodesis within 13 months of the initial procedure were compared. Patient complications were compared. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between the clinical outcomes of these patients and use of the IB as an additional source of stabilization. Results: A total of 132 cases were analyzed with 44 that employed the IB and 88 NIB. The average ages for each group were 46.7 and 46.5 years for the IB and NIB group respectively. Of the 44 IB patients, 0 out of the 10 (0.0%) who had received a preoperative MRI were correctly identified as having an attenuated or frankly torn spring ligament as determined intraoperatively. There were significant differences in failure rates between groups with 0.0% of IB procedures and 4.5% of NIB procedures resulting in failure (p=0.022). There were no significant differences among complications between groups. There were significant improvements between all pre- and post-operative radiographic measurements within each group. However, the improvements were not found to be significant between groups. Conclusion: The results of this systematic retrospective chart review demonstrate that the spring ligament internal-brace device may serve as an effective adjunct in PTTD procedures and suggest considering it when planning irrespective of preoperative MRI findings. The data suggest that failure rates may be reduced without increasing complications. Both methods of fixation can provide significant improvements in reconstructing the arch. However, the internal-brace may reduce the prevalence of post- operative malunion or the need for a triple arthrodesis.

A manikin study comparing the performance of traditional Macintosh laryngoscope, GlideScope®, Airtraq®, and video-optical intubation stylet in endotracheal intubation used by emergency doctors in simulated difficult airway intubation: A pilot study

Background: The video-optical intubation stylet (VS) is a slim, rigid but flexible intubating device that aids physicians to intubate patients, particularly with difficult airways. Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the performance of emergency department doctors in using different intubating devices for intubation in an airway manikin simulating different difficult airway scenarios. Methods: Thirty emergency department doctors were recruited in a pilot study. Their performance of using traditional Macintosh laryngoscope, GlideScope®, Airtraq® and C-MAC® Video Stylet were compared in three situations: normal, restricted cervical motion and limited oral aperture. The time for intubation, first attempt success rate, failure rate, dental injury and the subjective ease of different devices by the participants were compared. Result: The mean intubation time by VS in each scenario was significantly shorter compared with other devices (Normal: 19.77s vs 24.67–28.19s, p = 0.014; Cervical restriction: 20.85 vs 26.17–31.26s, p = 0.008; Limited oral aperture:19.03 vs 29.35, p = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in failure rate or first attempt success rate. The incidence of dental injury was significantly lower with VS than other laryngoscopes (p = 0.001, p &lt; 0.05 and p &lt; 0.05 in normal, cervical restriction and limited oral aperture scenarios, respectively). Moreover, participants appreciated that VS was the easiest device to intubate in each scenario. (p &lt; 0.05 in all scenarios) Conclusion: The performance of VS was comparable to or even better than the commonly used laryngoscopes in the emergency department in airway management. When adequate training is provided, VS can be a potentially good alternative for tracheal intubation in different situations.

Clinical outcomes in pediatric hydrocephalus patients treated with endoscopic third ventriculostomy and choroid plexus cauterization: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Endoscopic third ventriculostomy and choroid plexus cauterization (ETV+CPC) is a novel procedure for infant hydrocephalus that was developed in sub-Saharan Africa to mitigate the risks associated with permanent implanted shunt hardware. This study summarizes the hydrocephalus literature surrounding the ETV+CPC intraoperative abandonment rate, perioperative mortality rate, cerebrospinal fluid infection rate, and failure rate. This systematic review and meta-analysis followed a prespecified protocol and abides by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive search strategy using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted from database inception to October 2019. Studies included controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies of patients with hydrocephalus younger than 18 years of age treated with ETV+CPC. Pooled estimates were calculated using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects modeling, and the significance of subgroup analyses was tested using meta-regression. The quality of the pooled outcomes was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. After screening and reviewing 12,321 citations, the authors found 16 articles that met the inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate for the ETV+CPC failure rate was 0.44 (95% CI 0.37-0.51). Subgroup analysis by geographic income level showed statistical significance (p < 0.01), with lower-middle-income countries having a lower failure rate (0.32, 95% CI 0.28-0.36) than high-income countries (0.53, 95% CI 0.47-0.60). No difference in failure rate was found between hydrocephalus etiology (p = 0.09) or definition of failure (p = 0.24). The pooled estimate for perioperative mortality rate (n = 7 studies) was 0.001 (95% CI 0.00-0.004), the intraoperative abandonment rate (n = 5 studies) was 0.04 (95% CI 0.01-0.08), and the postoperative CSF infection rate (n = 5 studies) was 0.0004 (95% CI 0.00-0.003). All pooled outcomes were found to be low-quality evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides the most comprehensive pooled estimate for the ETV+CPC failure rate to date and demonstrates, for the first time, a statistically significant difference in failure rate by geographic income level. It also provides the first reported pooled estimates for the risk of ETV+CPC perioperative mortality, intraoperative abandonment, and CSF infection. The low quality of this evidence highlights the need for further research to improve the understanding of these critical clinical outcomes and their relevant explanatory variables and thus to appreciate which patients may benefit most from an ETV+CPC. Systematic review registration no.: CRD42020160149 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/).

Poster 191: Suture Anchor-Based Quadriceps Tendon Repair Results in Improved Patient Reported Outcomes Compared to the Transosseous Tunnel Technique

Objectives:Recent biomechanical studies have compared traditional transosseus (TO) quadriceps tendon repairs to newer techniques for suture anchor (SA) repair. However, clinical studies comparing the two techniques are limited. The purpose of this study was to compare failure rates and patient reported outcomes between TO and SA quadriceps tendon repairs.Methods:Following IRB approval, patients who underwent primary repair for quadriceps tendon rupture with transosseus tunnel (TO) or suture anchor (SA) techniques between January 2009 and August 2018 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were contacted by email or telephone interview for satisfaction (1-10 scale), current function (1-100 scale), failure (retear), and revision surgeries; International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS), Lysholm questionnaire outcomes were also collected.Results:Seventy patients (92.1%) were available by phone or email at a mean of 4.64±2.53 years postoperatively (transosseus sutures: 34 and suture anchor: 42). Out of these 70 patients, there were 10 failures for an overall failure rate of 14.29% (Table 1). Failure rates were not significantly different between treatment groups (TO: 5/34, 14.71% vs SA: 5/42, 11.90%, p=.622) (Figure 1). Patients in each repair group had similar satisfaction ratings (SA: 9.17±1.95 vs TO: 8.31±2.30, p=.102). The SA group reported higher subjective function (SA: 89.08±8.40 vs TO: 76.14±23.52, p=.003) and significantly greater final IKDC scores (72.30 ± 22.08 vs 56.80 ± 16.62; p=.041).Conclusions:In conclusion, there is no significant difference in failure rate between transosseus and suture anchor repairs for quadriceps tendon ruptures at a mean of 4.64±2.53 years of follow-up. Most failures occur secondary to a traumatic reinjury within the first year post-operatively. Patients who underwent suture anchor repair reported significantly greater subjective function and final IKDC, KOOS Pain, and KOOS Quality of Life scores.Figure 1.Kaplan Meler Survival curve demonstrating equivalent survival between repair groups (p=.940)Table 2.Descriptive Analysis of Surgical Failures

Paper 53: Comparing Graft Choice in Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction

Objectives:Disruption of the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) may lead to recurrent lateral patellar dislocation and patellofemoral chondral injury. Optimal graft choice for MPFL reconstruction in the surgical treatment of patellar instability is unknown. While autograft remains readily available, easily harvested, and of lower cost, allograft is a viable alternative and portends several benefits over autograft. Autograft may provide superior strength or lower re-tear rate, but allograft has been shown to have similar outcomes with less donor site morbidity in some series. Overall, there is a paucity of research comparing autograft vs allograft in MPFL reconstruction. Prior studies have been limited by small sample sizes, incomplete data, or heterogeneous patient population. The objectives of this study were to compare outcomes scores, return to activity and revision rates between allograft and autograft in MPFL reconstruction. The authors hypothesized that there would be no significant difference in outcomes between those who received an allograft and those who received an autograft in MPFL reconstruction.Methods:Patients who underwent isolated MPFL reconstruction with allograft or autograft at a single institution between 2013-2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with a follow-up of less than 2 years were excluded, along with those who underwent concomitant tibial tubercle osteotomy or trochleoplasty. Patients were contacted to complete functional assessments including the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Visual Analog Scale for pain (VAS), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. Patient demographics and complications were also reviewed. Outcomes were compared between those that underwent allograft and autograft MPFL reconstructionResults:Out of the fourty-six patients that were retrospectively reviewed, thirty-one (67.4%) patients underwent allograft reconstruction, while fifteen (32.6%) patients underwent autograft reconstruction. There were no differences between the two groups in age at surgery (25.2 years old in allograft vs 26.3 years old in autograft group, P=0.726), sex ratio (19F/12M in allograft and 9F/6M in autograft, P=1.000), or BMI (27.0 in allograft and 24.8 in autograft, P=0.179).There was a mean follow up duration of 4.57 years in the allograft group and 4.83 years in the autograft group (P=0.672), with an overall response rate of 70.2%. There were no differences between the two groups when assessing subjective pain using SANE (66.7 in allograft vs 74.5 in autograft, P=0.334) or VAS score (35.7 in allograft vs 22.9 in autograft, P=0.110). Further there were no differences in patient outcomes as assessed by IKDC score (68.3 in allograft vs 76.2 in autograft, P=0.247). Patients who received an allograft returned to activity at an average of 5.9 months, while patients who received an autograft returned to activity at an average of 5.2 months (P=0.416). One patient in the allograft group required revision surgery (P=0.246).Conclusions:Both allograft and autograft remain viable options in MPFL reconstruction. There were no significant differences in failure rates, PROs, pain, or time to return to play between allograft and autograft MPFL reconstruction in this series.

Meniscal Repair Outcomes at &gt;5 Years: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction:Meniscal repair techniques (inside-out, all-inside, outside-in) continue to evolve. Assessment of meniscus repair outcomes at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively appears to best represent the true failure rates compared to 1 and 2-year timepoints. In the last decade, the literature on outcomes of meniscus repair has grown significantly.Purpose:To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the rate of failure after meniscal repair at a minimum 5 years postoperatively.Methods:We performed a systematic review of studies reporting the outcomes of meniscal repair at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. A standardized search strategy was utilized with the assistance of a medical librarian. s and full-text articles were reviewed by two reviewers to identify studies assessing the clinical outcome of meniscus repair, which was most uniformly assessed by reoperation. Outcomes were assessed (when reported) relative to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) status, sex, age, and postoperative rehabilitation protocol. Pooling of data and meta-analysis with a random-effects model were performed.Results:A total of 28 studies of 1712 patients were included. In the last decade, 15 studies of 1168 patients have been reported, compared to 566 patients in 13 studies in the previous decade. The pooled failure rate of all devices was 22.2% (365/1712) and the failure rates of modern repairs was 17.5% (194/1128). Medial repairs were significantly more likely to fail compared to lateral repairs (26.4% [178/745] v. 13.0% [55/365], p=0.01). Failure rates varied from 16.9% for inside-out (78/501), 16.2% modern all-inside (66/396), 20.2% for outside-in (34/153), and 19.8% for open (22/109). First generation all-inside devices had a significantly higher failure rate (30.3%) compared to modern all-inside devices (16.2%) (p=0.01). There was no significant difference in failure rates between meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction (19.0%) and isolated meniscal repairs (19.6%, p=0.780). There was also no difference between post-operative rehabilitation protocols, sex, or age (all p>0.05).Conclusions:The outcomes of meniscal repair at a minimum 5 years postoperatively had an overall failure rate of 21.8%. Modern all-inside meniscus repair techniques appear to have improved the success rates compared to first-generation all-inside devices, and now appear similar to those of inside-out meniscus repair. Lateral repairs were significantly more likely to be successful compared to medial repairs. Finally, despite traditional teaching that ACL reconstruction improves rates of meniscus healing, across ˜700 patients, no difference in rates of healing were seen in ACL reconstruction compared to isolated meniscus repair.Figure 1.Scatter Plot of the failure rate reported by the study compared time of follow up completed. Each study is represented by a dot, the size of which represents the indivudual study’s sample size. A simple linear regression line of best fit is shown (R2=0.02).Figure 2.Forest plot demonstrating failure rates sorted by the technique of repair used. All inside divices were subdivided into first generation (meniscal arrows) and modern (defined as 2nd generation and newer). Other techniques include inside out, outside in, and open.Es=Estimated significance; 95% CI-95% Confidence interval.

Transradial Access in Coronary Angiography: A Study of its Safety and Efficacy in Comparison to Transfemoral Access

Introduction: Coronary angiography is traditionally performed through transfemoral access. Transradial access is increasingly being used for this purpose for its various advantages. However, its use in Bangladesh is less well studied. The aim of this study was to find out the safety and efficacy of transradial access as compared to transfemoral access. Methods: This was a single-center, cross-sectional study. 100 randomly selected elective coronary angiography from August 2017 to September 2018 by the same operator using either transradial access or transfemoral access were analyzed. Results: Among 100 coronary angiography, transradial access were 50 and transfemoral access were 50. Fluoroscopy time was 3.08[1-9] vs 1.47 [1-17] minutes (p=.014), dose area product was 4807 [1947-11489] vs 3202 [1130-12826] ìGy.m2 (P&lt;0.001), total dose was 788 [276-2055] vs 520 [158-2424] mGy (p&lt;0.001). Transradial failure occurred in 4 (8%) cases. Transfemoral failure occurred in 1 (2%) case. There was no significant difference in failure rate between the groups (p= 0.169). Ecchymosis was the commonest (10% in transradial access vs 22% in transfemoral access, p= 0.102) among post procedure complications. Other complications like thrombophlebitis (6% vs 18%, p=0.004); hematoma (0% vs 12%, p= 0.005); puncture site bleed (2% vs 4%, p= 0. 039) were seen in TRA and transfemoral access, respectively. Conclusion: Access site complications are more in transfemoral access. Transradial access is an effective alternative to transfemoral access, and it can be performed safely by experienced operators. J Bangladesh Coll Phys Surg 2022; 40: 93-98